MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042304144 · doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2020.135246

Motor point stimulation primarily activates motor nerve

2020· article· en· W3042304144 on OpenAlexafffund
Kento Nakagawa, Austin J. Bergquist, Taro Yamashita, Takashi Yoshida, Kei Masani

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroscience Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAntidromicH-reflexStimulationNeuroscienceReciprocal inhibitionSoleus muscleMotor neuronHyperpolarization (physics)ReflexSpinal cordMotor nerveAnatomyChemistryMedicineBiologySkeletal muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrical stimulation for inducing muscle contraction can be divided into peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) and motor point stimulation (MPS). Although the neural pathways activated by PNS have been well studied, those by MPS are still unclear. Here we investigated whether MPS activates Ia-sensory nerves and induces antidromic firing of motor nerves. Ten able-bodied males and females participated in this study. We confirmed that soleus MPS did not induce the H-reflex while soleus PNS did. Furthermore, MPS of the tibialis anterior muscle did not induce the reciprocal inhibition of soleus muscle while PNS did. For testing the effect of MPS on motor neuron excitability, we examined the H-reflex modulation by soleus MPS. When the conditioning and test interval was under 100-ms and the conditioning stimulus intensity was above 30-mA, soleus MPS induced the H-reflex inhibition. This suggests that soleus MPS produces antidromic firing that can induce after-hyperpolarization. These results suggest that MPS predominantly activates the motor nerve without depolarizing the Ia-sensory nerve. Since MPS is applicable to larger number of muscles compared to PNS, utilizing MPS can lead to more versatile neuromodulation of the spinal cord.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroscience LettersSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207